Who Here Are Old Enough to Remember Back Alley Abortions?

When it comes to abortion, the subject of the procedure should be referred to as the pregnant person rather than as the mother. It seems more appropriate.

 

By taking away legal abortions, you are forcing a lot of women (once again, the poorest, the most in need of an abortion, because women with some financial means who chose to have an abortion will just take a little "vacation" to a country where abortion is safe) toresort to back alley abortion, or self abortion.

I was 16 years old the year when two of my friends got pregnant. One told her parents, a good Catholic family, and the dad took her on a trip to Switzerland, where abortions were already safe and legal. she went on to marry 5 years later and to have two sons. she is now a happy granma.

The other, also from a good Catholic family, wasn't so lucky. . . She couldn't tell her parents, and she couldn't continue the pregnancy without being thrown on the street at the age of 16. She used a metal coat hanger to abort byinsering it in her uterus and keeping it there while she laid in bed crying all night. The next morning, she removed it, and she thought it had not worked, because although it was painful, nothing had happened. Two days later, on her way home from school, where she had suffered horrible cramps all day, she began hemorraging, lost consciousness on the bus, and was taking to a hospital. she alomst lost her life. She for ever lost he ability to have a child.

She told me about what had happened to her when she came back to school, 4 weeks later.

This is the reality of back alley abortion. This is the reality of what happens when people with misguided good intention make abortion illegal. It doesn't stop abortions, no more than abortions have been stopped by men's laws since the creation of the world.

Why do you think that abortion remains an issue today? If laws had been able to stop abortions, it would have done so hundreds of years ago. . .we would no longer have to talk about it.

The only thing that can curb (not completely eliminate, but curb) abortions is sex education, efficient birth control, and the morning after pills.

 

For once, I agree with you.

It takes a lot more than getting pregnant to become a mother.

 

Everyone who wants to re-enslave women sexually is desperate keen to get back to back-street abortion and gruesome deaths-by-gin-and-knitting-needle. It is just that they lie to themselves. If they started wanting to re-impose prohibition, they wouldn't 'want' a new Al Capone, but they'd still get one. The evil done by American right-wing hypocricy is vast and unending.

 

What about the right of the trillions of sperms and eggs that will never even meet? According to your way of thinking, they also are potential humans. . .

And we all started as fetus, but if we had not been carried to term by our mothers, we would never have had the knowledge or the ability to even think about our beginnig as fetus. We would simply not exist in the form we are today. We would not be creatures, just a void.

So what?

 

Americans aren't interested in the opinions of hostile foreigners on internal American affairs. Only American opinions count.

 

You're doomed then, kid. Bye!

 

And the moral of the story is that good catholic girls should not be having sex at 16 years old.

 

The obvious answer: castrate all the men and boys. They can read the Bible instead and work harder for the rich!

 

I don't remember much pre-1973 ... but I have seen "Dirty Dancing" (1987). Which is a film conservatives are now required to hate.

Why? Because the dirtygirlwhogetspregnant is treated as a sympathetic character, and the results of the back alley butchery are featured.

Also, the sex between Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Gray is shown as joyful and laughter-filled and free of guilt. That is not permitted in the conservative world.

Plus, it dissed Ayn Rand followers.

(Yes, it's really cheesy in parts. But it's also on a bunch of "Top ten movies of all time" lists. It's a big guilty pleasure for many people.)

Luckily for conservatives, their PC fanaticism has taken over Hollywood, and it's now nearly forbidden, in movies or TV, for a woman to have an abortion. "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" (1982) is pretty much the only other movie where a woman has an abortion.

 

I thought the moral was that there are a lot of sick, twisted pervo control freaks out there, who are spending their days obsessing about whether women are having sex without their permission.

 

I knew we'd "meet again" lol!!

Once again we have you forgetting about Star Trek! While not in a movie (before you wine about that lol) there was an episode in Deep Space Nine that showed Abortion was irrelevant in the future. Just "beam" the baby to another willing woman.

BTW, Conservatives are against "PC", and you're wrong about Hollywood too, since they are in the process of remaking the movie with a release date of July 26th 2013.

REF: http://twitter.com/#!/LionsgateNews/status/132263836764995584

 

Some observations that I forgot to point out in my first response to this post.

Regarding the first story, the good Catholic family takes their daughter all the way to Switzerland to get an abortion which is a sin according to the Catholic Church. The father is a terrible example of a parent because he is willing to spend money to take his own daughter to a foreign country to kill his own grandchild. He is neither a good father or Catholic. I am glad that she was able to have two children to fill the void created when she killed her first child in Switzerland.

Regarding the second story, the second teen also seems to have chosen the worst possible outcome. She damaged herself and killed the only child she ever had. She should have trusted her parents who obviously found out anyway. Perhaps her good Catholic parents would have encouraged her to have the child, and put it up for adoption or keep it. 16 year olds are obviously not wise enough to make such decisions on their own. It's not like they were Muslims who would have honor killed her.

 

Catholics have no right to try to tell anyone else what to do. They can have all the kids they want, as it is.

 

You really don't understand, do you?

No one should have unprotected sex, or sex without birth control. . .unless they are in a position to and WANT to bring a child to this world, and care for that child for at least 18 years (in fact, for ever, at least emotionally).

But, there has ALWAYS been, and there will ALWAYS be unwanted pregnancies. . .and that doesn't mean that every woman (or young girl) who gets pregnant is promiscuous or evil. And it is NOT limited to Catholic girls. In fact, there may be MORE young Catholic girls who do get pregnant because of the lack of realistic sex education and the lack of acceptance of birth control by the Catholic Church.

If you can't understand that, you are lacking in realistic thinking.

 

Seeking an early term abortion for a young woman who could absolutely not care for the child doesn't make one evil. It makes one realistic and caring toward his child.

Who are you to judge whether the second girl "should have trusted her parents?" Did I tell you who was the father of the child? Do you REALLY believe that having the "appearance" of being a good Church goer makes one a saint? Do you have ANY idea how many "good Catholic families" have send their daughters away, either to have an abortion, or to give birth to a child that was then taken away from the daughter?

By the way: NEITHER of these girls killed a child. they aborted an early term fetus.

The point is that, the girl who had access to a safe abortion suffered NO negative consequences.

The girl who didn't suffered all her life.

 

Ridiculous statements.

By the way. . .just in case you don't realize it, SC law makers are overwhelmingly CONSERVATIVE and HYPER RELIGIOUS.

 

YEP! No life lost there!
Except than some extreme pro-lifers and hyper religious people would still feel it is a sin to terminate the "potential" life producing quality of the little spermatozoids!



By the way, why hasn't science come up with a MALE birth control pill yet?

 

You thought well and the little sluts MUST be punished.

 

This is hilarious!!

Let me see here, according to your "realistic thinking" these girls are going out and sinning by having premarital sex, but aren't using artificial birth control because it's a sin?

BTW, where is the link for info on "MORE young Catholic girls who do get pregnant" I'd like to see the study you based this on.

 

and be careful what you wish for...like the girl that didn't want to have a baby...now she won't EVER have to worry about it again. She can have all the casual meaningless sex with all the boys now with no worries!

 

see they want to have it both ways....girls get pregnant because those mean parents won't invite boys over, light some candles, put a condom on him and send him on into her bedroom...

but OTHER girls (the ones WITH the understanding *wink wink* "Hey kids, let's all get drunk and hump everything in sight! You're old enough, heck, ya walkin' aincha? Get out there girl before you're too old!" parents...) get knocked up, well it's because they made a mistake, or didn't use the birth control method correctly...and they NEED a backup system in place...

 

the REAL tragedy is this idea that we either have to have completely free, paid for by the taxpayers abortions; condoms in every classroom, sex ed starting in preschool, and porn on every corner

OR

there will be a holocaust of women and children bleeding to death on motel floors complete with photographic evidence for the pervs to post on forums and drool over....(and bemoan the death of the WOMAN but completely ignore the dead baby laying there...dead woman = appalling tragedy...dead baby = FREEDOM!! woo hooo!)

it's bullcrap.

we have room to meet in the middle if the two sides didn't have to be so opposed to compromise.

 

Careful dear, your religions nutcase and judgmental holier that you attitude is showing just a bit. How would you feel if someone called you the same thing?

 

First, I was referring (answering) to a stupid statement made that said something like: "the moral of the story is that 16 year old Catholic girl should not have sex."

And still I believe that the "restrictions" and "guilt" placed on women by the Catholic Church does contribute to young girls being caught anaware (or unprepared) in situations where they are no longer thinking with their head. . .or their faith, but with their 16 year old hormone driven bodies. . . not unlike EVERY teenage boy, by the way!

And, yes, many of those young girls truly try to "avoid sin" and go on a date with all "good intentions." So, they do not carry condoms, they do not (heaven forbid!) use birth control pills, so as to obey to the Pope, and their parents would NEVER help them to have access to birth control pills or even condoms. Yet, youths will be youth, and when "love" calls, it certainly doesn't "FEEL" sinful anymore. . .until the heat is gone. And look at it this way. . .they can always go to confession the next day to get absolution!

Now. . .I assume you are not a young girl and have NEVER been one?
And I assume you NEVER sin unless you INTENT to sin a couple of days ahead of time? (especially if your sex drive is raging. . .unless of course, you don't have a sex drive. . .or you are so ugly that no one would ever tempt you into "sinning?")

Get real!